Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
User Experience with Collaborative Robots –Ford Motor Company
David GravelTechnical Expert – Robotics and Automation
Ford Motor Company
Agenda1. 1. What are collaborative robots?
2. What internal and external specifications apply to this new technology?
3. What kinds of collaborative robots have been planned for use at Ford?
4. New Safety Paradigms
5. Benchmarking findings
6. Summary
Collaborative Robots
• New form of force and power limited robots that are designed to be able to collaborate with humans directly. This robotic technology has the potential for Ford to place robots on the line right next to people without perimeter guarding
• Even though these robots are force and power limited they can still represent a hazard to workers and may require risk mitigation methods to be applied
Collaborative Robot Market Snapshot
We evaluated a large number
of collaborative robot suppliers
before settling on two mgfrs.
1) Universal Robotic for pick
and place applications
2) KUKA LBR for force
controlled assembly tasks
A large number of robot manufacturers were evaluated for payloads, reach, controls interfaces...etc.
Note: There are new collaborative manufactures coming out with new products frequently
Universal UR10 vs. KUKA LBR
Universal UR10 Robot
• 10kg payload, 1.2m reach
• 6 axis robot
• Easy programming interface with Polyscope scripting hidden underneath the main script language
KUKA LBR
• 14kg payload, 1.2m reach
• 7 axis robot
• Force control applications
• Java programming interface
Collaborative Robots vs. Humans
Collaborative Robot Human
Can use sensors to “see” certain trained things (camera,
laser scanner, light curtain, pressure mat)
Vision – can see and understand what they are seeing
Can limit forces imparted to the environment by
programmed means
Can have a gentle touch, and understand how to use
contact forces to acquire or position parts
Specific process switches and other inputs can be used
to make decisions
Other senses available – hearing, taste, smell
Strong and never tire Relatively weak and prone to repetitive stress injury
Can be moved and explicitly re-programmed Easy to redeploy, very flexible, with minimal instruction
Can be pre-programmed to handle process variation Handles process variation well
Highly precise positioning Imprecise
Can be explicitly programmed for assembly People are naturally good at assembly
Robot Application Space
Collaborative robots expand the range of robotic applications.
Pressing
Moving large parts
Dual Spindle
Rundown
Washing
Small Parts
Fixed location
(kitting)
InspectionSingle Spindle
Rundown
Small parts
Random loc
(future)
Personal Helper
Tight Spaces
(Close human
interaction, physical
guarding limitations)
“Surgical Assistant”
RTV Application
Mobile Work
(Fetch & Return)
Finesse Assembly
Collaborative Robot Standards
External
• ISO 10218 Parts 1&2 , Robots for industrial environments
– Main ISO document that applies worldwide to our Ford robot cells, including collaborative robot cell requirements. Harmonized with American National Standard for Industrial Robots and Robot Systems- Safety Requirements (revision of ANSI/RIA R15.06-1999)
• ISO TS/15066, Robots and robotic devices – Collaborative Robots (Feb 2016)
– Biomechanical force and pressure limits for various body parts for onset of pain
Internal
• FAS08-131 is the top robot document
• Core Controls Attachment 14 – Robot Programming Specification
ISO TS/15066 Specification
Use of the ISO TS/15066
Biomechanical Limit Tables
are the generally accepted
method for evaluating
collaborative robot safety
New Safety ParadigmRobot presence sensing may not be required for collaborative power and force limited robots if the forces / pressures are under the ISO TS/15066 Biomechanical Limits for the onset of pain.
1. Verify forces and pressures are under the ISO TS/15066 limits, eliminating the need for slowing or stopping the robot if a person is in the work envelope of the robot
-OR-
2. If the forces or pressure are too high, the use other forms of control such as administrative controls, or controls such as laser scanners, pressure mats, light curtains…etc. to detect personnel intrusions to slow or stop the robot if people are near
CO
NV
EY
OR
Part
Handling
Robot
Warning
Field
(SLOW)
Protective
Field
(STOP)
Risk Mitigation Methods andImpact on the Risk Assessment
1. Elimination - Design out high forces and pressures
2. If forces/pressure cannot be designed out and exceed the TS/15066 limits then an action like the ones below should be done:
a. Block access to hazard with peripheral equipment eliminating access to hazardous area
b. Add a presence sensing device to slow/stop robot
c. Provide administrative keep out areas using floor markings and simple barriers
Benchmarking Showing We Are On Track
Summary1. There are new kinds of force and power limited robots, often referred to as
“collaborative robots”, can be engineered to be safe working along side of people with no hard perimeter guarding to prevent access to the robot.
2. The ISO standard 10218 Parts 1&2, and the ISO specification TS/15066 are the guiding documents to determine if the collaborative robot is Safe to operate.
3. Risk Assessments matter – A broadly cross functional risk assessment Team is the right kind of team to do a Risk Assessment with to avoid subjectivity and to properly identify all the real risks
4. The End Effector design matters - In terms of pressure, so if it has sharp edges that cannot be shielded from the operator, it will be extremely hard to have forces and pressure less than the ISO TS/15066 limits.
5. Operator position matters – In terms of potential pinch points with the robot during it’s motion. Care must be taken to not produce a potential entrapment point of a body part between the robot and other objects as a basic design criteria when using collaborative robots
Contact Information
David GravelTechnical Expert - Robotics & Automation
Ford Advanced Manufacturing EngineeringLivonia, Michigan USA
Telephone: +1 (313) 805-8575
User Experience with Collaborative Robots –General Electric
Greg HeinzAutomation CoE Leader
GE Healthcare
2
Supply Chain…Global Scale, Local Presence
World-Class Imaging
•
•
•
Women’s Health
Seno~$100k-500k
Lunar ~$20k-200k
Interventional Cardiology & Radiology
Image Guided Systems~$0.5-2MM
General Imaging
Revolution CT~$0.2-3MM
SIGNA MR~$0.5-10MM
Molecular Imaging
Discovery ~$0.2-3MM
Surgery
Surgical C-Arms~$20-200K
General imagingLOGIQ $25-200k
Primary care Vscan $7-25k
Women’s health – Voluson$25-150k
CardiacVivid $25-200k
A Broad Life Sciences Portfolio
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• Launching pad for new technologies– Cobots, Inspection, Additive, Augmented Reality…
• Driving productivity, quality, capacity through Technology
• Rapid proto-typing, Training, Development, Design
AME Technology Center…Driving Technology to Sites
AME Technology Center…Touching Multiple Products & Sites
RethinkSawyer
UniversalUR3,5,10
ABBYuMi
Tecnalia - Hero
μm
Pi4 Robotics
workerbot
FanucCR-35iA
AME Technology Center…Touching Multiple Products & Sites
Active & Potential Cobot Project Sites:• Cardiff, Uppsala, Mexico, China, Electric Avenue,
Madison, Umea, Uppsala, Oslo, Rehovot, Cork…
Products, Applications, Business units• Pressure Cuffs, Ultrasound probes, Anesthesia valves,
filter plates, Mercury packs, Contrast media, etc.• Loading, unloading, packaging, palletizing, testing,
machine tending, etc.• ISS, Ultrasound, LCS, Life Sciences…
GEHC Cardiff Site…Easicollect Assembly Process
•
•
•
Easicollect Assembly Machine
Universal Robot (UR5)
GEHC Cardiff Site… Easicollect Assembly Components
• Mitsubishi PLC Control System
• Pilz Estop relay
• Dedicated Compressed air supply, isolation and dump valve
• ioLogik E1212
•Moxa Remote Ethernet I/O 8DI/8DIO 2-port Switch
•
•
GEHC Cardiff Site…Perform a Risk Assessment
Design Considerations• Limited forces and speed on robot• Eliminate pinch points, sharp edges• Understand restricted space boundaries
Task Identification• Frequency and duration of human presence• Frequency and duration of operator/robot
interaction.• Transition between non-collaborative and
collaborative operation modes.
GEHC Cardiff Site…Risk Estimation & Evaluation Criteria
Task Identification
• Identify the risks
• Identify the risk level
• Mitigate risk
• Re-identify risk level
• Is it low enough?
• If not – re-evaluate
GEHC Cardiff Site…Easicollect Risk Reduction
• Risk reduction measures• Covers over valve and fittings with rounded edges
• Force and speed limits
• Use of laser scanner to reduce speed on approach
• Moving the reject bin outside robot zone
• Use of clear floor markers
• Use of 3rd party to risk assessment thedesign and validate the forces and speed
Easicollect… Final Thoughts• Drives productivity
• Eliminates EHS risks
• Increases quality
• Lowers cost to produce
• 3RD Risk Assessment of new application by Pilz safety expert “Elena Dominguez”
Happier
customers
Contact Information
Greg Heinz
Automation CoE Leader
GE HeathcareWaukesha, Wisconsin USA
Telephone: +1 (262) 309-5417
User Experiences withCollaborative Robots Panel
Chris IhrkeStaff Engineer
General Motors
Collaborative Robots in GM• Currently have Fanuc CR-35iA collaborative robots in 5
plants doing 6 unique applications– Target positioning
– Headlight aiming
– Dispensing
– Fastening
– Vision inspection
– Pick and place MH
• Working on more– Adhesive wet-out on a moving line
– Vision error proofing of stampings and assembly
– Material Handling of engine head assemblies, PCB’s
• We expect our use of collaborative robots to grow exponentially in the coming years
Collaborative Applications• Target Positioning
– Active Safety Calibration
• Headlight Aiming– Tool Changing with Active Safety Target
Collaborative Applications• Hot Glue Dispensing
– Headliner Assembly
• Fastening– Turbocharger Assembly to Engine
Collaborative Applications• Vision Inspection
– Sheet metal quality
• Pick and Place MH– Spare tire handling
Spare Tire Video
Risk Assessment
• Observations (partial list)– Possibility of an observer coming in contact with
moving robot (or tool, or carried tire).
– Possibility of placing fingers between gripper and tire while gripper is engaging tire.
– Possibility of placing hand between tires at drop location.
– Possibility of robot dropping tire from too high over stack.
– Possibility of loss of air or power while robot is holding a tire.
– Possibility that another person enters robot envelope while someone is Teaching robot.
– Manual backup operation.
• GM Standard Risk Assessment Process (G-Risk)
A B C D E L
Mitigation Strategy
A C F
A C H I
H I J
F G
A E
M N O Q
Risk Assessment
A. Collaborative active safety featuresB. Collaborative passive safety featuresC. Sensitivity selectionD. Envelope restriction by DCSE. Awareness measuresF. EOAT mechanical designG. EOAT pneumatic designH. Path programmingI. Program logic
J. Fault recovery positionK. Sensor positioningL. High visibility paintM. Overhead cable routingN. Dolly stop designO. Safe Operating ProceduresP. MPS placardQ. Awareness training
Mitigation Strategies
Risk Mitigation Examples• Gripper
– Soft covering
– Extended diameter
– Finger details retract into cast rubber “bumper”
• Gravity– Monitoring of cart in position
– Monitoring of stack height
– Cross-checking of stack counts with sensor measurements
– Air Circuit
• Trip Hazards
Third Party Validation• Required Fanuc achieve TÜV certification of their
collaborative robot product safety function.
• For the configurable elements of the safety system– A checklist and procedure was created to verify all of the
mitigations from the Risk Assessment that were implemented in safe software (DCS).
– SICK, Inc. was contracted as a third party to perform the validation.
Words of WisdomFor First Time Implementation
• Choose the right application– Limit risk and complexity
– Initial success is important
• Engage the right people as early as possible– Safety Community, Union, Maintenance, Production, Validator
Photo by Jonathan Kozowyk
For Forbes Magazine, May 2015
• Pay attention to the details– Risk Assessment, Validation,
Training
• Follow your safety process– Adapt it where necessary
Contact Information
Chris Ihrke
Staff Engineer,Global Robotics Standards
General MotorsWarren, Michigan USA
Telephone: +1 (248) 640-8877
Add Your
Logo Here
User Experience with Collaborative Robots –Procter & Gamble
Mark LewandowskiGlobal Engineering Robotics Innovation Leader
Procter & Gamble
Agenda
• P&G At a Glance
• Why Use Collaborative Robots?
• Selecting Applications for Cobots
• Ensuring Safe Applications
P&G At A Glance
• $65B in sales
• 21 brands with annual sales > $1B
• 11 brands with annual sales $500M - $1B
• Consumers in more than 180 countries
Innovation – The Lifeblood of P&G
Products Process
Why Use Collaborative Robots?
• Robots are cool!
• Collaborative robots are even cooler!
Selecting Applications - General
• Simple to implement and use
• Advantages in:– Cost of implementing
• “Cage-Free” Robotics
– Eliminates guarding
– Reduces Floor Space
• Reduced Engineering Costs
– Flexibility• Adaptive and reconfigurable
– Easy and intuitive programming
• Portable
– Move robot to the applications as needed
Selecting Applications - General
For Robotics in General
• Look for processes and tasks that are:– Dull
– Dirty
– Dangerous/Ergonomic Issues
Selecting Applications - Cobots
Key Collaborative Advantage
Enables partial automation opportunities where it was “All or Nothing”
Successful Application Features
Cobots provide value and succeed when:
• Low speed - 6-8 cycles per min
• Low payload - less than 10kg typically
• Little or no robotics expertise available
• Processes/Machinery with Low Utilization
• Processes previously seen as uneconomical or too complex where partial automation may be feasible or desirable
Ensuring Safe Applications
• Follow the standards– U.S. – RIA 15.06
– International – ISO 10218
– ISO TS 15066
• Key Requirement in Each:
RISK ASSESSMENT!!!!!
Collaborative Risk Assessment
Not just for the robot–A comprehensive risk assessment is required to assess
not only the robot system itself but also the environment in which it is placed, i.e. the workplace. “ (TS 15066)
4.3 Hazard identification and risk assessment
Shall consider:• Robot related hazards
• Hazards related to the robot system
• Application related hazards
Risk Assessment Process
Risk Estimation
Risk ReductionDesign Safeguards Warning Training PPE
Risk Estimation
Hazard IdentificationRobot Gripper Conveyor Ancillary Equipment
Identify TasksNormal Operation Minor Servicing Set-up Cleaning
Define the LimitsUse Space Time
Reference RIA TR R15.306-2014 as guide to
Risk Assessment Process
Hazard Mitigations Methods
• Design out by geometry and limits
• Padding
• Collision detection
• Envelope or reach limiting
• Force or speed limiting
• Selective use of scanners or traditional guarding in critical areas
Reference RIA TR R15.306-2014 as guide to
Risk Assessment Process
Force Limiting
• Defined in TS15066
• Based on affected body area
Measuring Forces
Measurement device/technique not specified by standards
Potential Options– Fraunhofer IFF Test Lab
– Spring Gauge
– Digital Gauge (high sampling frequency requiredto capture impact)
– High Speed Video
Contact Information
Mark Lewandowski
Robotics Network Innovation Leader
Procter & GambleWest Chester, Ohio USA
Telephone: +1 (513) 634-9011